|
HD
Tach 2.61
In
Testa Cd Labs' own words "HD Tach is a physical
performance hard drive test for Windows. The HD Tach
sequential read test is a little bit different from
other benchmarks. Most benchmarks create a file on
the hard drive and test within that file. The problem
is that modern hard drives use a zone bit recording
technique that allows different read speeds depending
on where the data is located. Data on the outside
of the drive is much faster than data recorded on
the inside.
HD
Tach reads from areas all over the hard drive and
reports an average speed. It also logs the read speeds
to a text file that you can load into a spreadsheet
and graph to visually read the results of the test."
Western Digital WD2000-BB (200GB)
Maxtor DiamondMax D740X (80GB)
The
WD2000-BB's average read throughput betters that of
the Maxtor by some 14000kps though HDTach only read
to 123GB for some reason which will inflate the score
somewhat. Once again we see a fairly unexciting burst
speed of just 63.7mbps which will have relatively
little influence on overall performance in regular
use but which is still a little unusual given its
other strengths.
Drive!
For NT v1.0
Drive
for NT is created by Michael Radchenko, the author
responsible for HDDSpeed and offers similar capabilities
to HDDSpeed but runs from within Windows.
I
happened to have an 8MB cache, 100MB "Special
Edition" WD1000JB on hand while I was running
this one so I threw the results in for the fun of
it.
Western Digital WD2000-BB (200GB)
Maxtor DiamondMax D740X (80GB)
Western Digital WD1000-JB (100GB+ 8MB cache)
Okay
so it's another synthetic benchmark and some of the
results are starting to fall out of step a little
now but what we see here is that the WD2000-BB is
a very good match for the older WD1000JB in all but,
you guessed it, cache read performance! Access times
also seem a little high here too which goes against
what we saw earlier. I'm speculating here but it seems
that Western Digital may have tweaked some parameters
in their firmware that make for a very impressive
overall performance but at the expense of some individual
performance characteristics.
|
